The Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah disparaged the science of logic and said of it: "The intelligent person gains no benefit from it, and the dull-witted person does not understand it." As for Ibn Hazm, he said:

The questioner : Shaykh, regarding Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, when he spoke about logic and philosophy, he said: "It is a subject from which the intelligent person gains no benefit, because the rational proofs and evidence found in it are to be found in the Book and the Sunnah, so there is no benefit in it. And the dull-witted person does not understand anything of it." But Muhammad ibn Hazm says in this matter: "Whoever forbids logic has a defect in his intellect." This is incorrect; it means he accuses him of having little intellect and little intelligence. Logic, to the point where he says it is necessary for understanding what came in the Book and the Sunnah.

The Shaykh : With your right hand, with your right hand, yes.

The questioner : Establishing rational, logical proofs in themselves, Shaykh, he said that this aids in understanding the Book and the Sunnah, and aids in debate in discussions, in confronting the Jews, the Sophists, the Christians, and also the people of Kalam and all the Islamic sects. He sees that there is no fault in logic for one who takes it from its correct source, establishing rational proof. For example, when he discusses with the Sophists, or when he discusses with the Sophists, Shaykh, he speaks with rational proofs, refuting their proofs with purely rational proofs.

The Shaykh : It may benefit the logicians, but it does not benefit the Muslim scholars, especially those among them who are scholars of the Book and the Sunnah. Because, as I quoted from Ibn Taymiyyah, in the Qur'an and the Sunnah there is what suffices for all those proofs and evidence. But the sad reality, and this is one of the effects of the science of Kalam, is that when many of the sects turned away from the proofs of the Book and the Sunnah and were afflicted with the study of logic, they found in it what they imagine to be proofs and evidence by which they can establish the argument against their opponents. These people lost the true proof and found the illusory proof, which has its effect and its impact. And Ibn Hazm, without a doubt, was living in a society afflicted with sects and groups of Jews and Christians of various religions, so he found in the science of logic what helps him to establish the argument against them with their knowledge. But the Muslim does not need any of this, and I mean, of course, the Muslim scholar who knows the Book and the Sunnah. For example, take His saying, the Exalted: This is a Shari'ah proof, but it is also rational and logical. The scholar of the evidence of the Book and the Sunnah never finds anything to gain from the other sciences unless he is ignorant of what is in the Book and the Sunnah. This is my opinion, and Allah knows best.

The questioner : May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : And what is the question that is needed?
The student : Do you have a question?